Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?

From: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>,"Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>,"Psql_General (E-mail)" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org>,PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?
Date: 2005-04-04 20:01:29
Message-ID: 42519D19.4000704@commandprompt.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-generalpgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:

>Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>>... If there are no license or build issues I'm in favor.
>>
>
>Peter has pointed out that the problem of circular dependencies is a
>showstopper for integrating plPHP.  The build order has to be
>	Postgres
>	PHP (since its existing DB support requires Postgres to build)
>	plPHP
>so putting #1 and #3 into the same package is a no go.  Which is too
>bad, but I see no good way around it.
>
O.k. I am confused here. You do not need PHP DB support for plPHP. You only
need the php.so (once were done anyway). Which means that as long as PHP
is installed it will work, just like plperl or plpython.

The ONLY reason you would build PHP separately is if your stock installed
PHP didn't have a feature enabled that you want. This has nothing at all
to do with plPHP.

Sincerely,

Joshua D. Drake




>
>			regards, tom lane
>


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-04-04 20:17:08
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2005-04-04 19:56:28
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?

pgsql-general by date

Next:From: Tom LaneDate: 2005-04-04 20:17:08
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?
Previous:From: Robert TreatDate: 2005-04-04 19:56:28
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] plPHP in core?

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group